Posted at 07.10.2018
Post modernism was devised from its earlier motion, modernism and first began to emerge about the areas of America in the 1960s but really took off around the early 1970s when it emerged to Great britain and Europe and became a motion. It still carries on to effect modern architecture today. By far the most obvious design qualities is seen in architecture; features that best represent this style include vivid, visible exteriors, designs that are useful yet contain architectural characteristics that have been seen before but merging these with interesting, colourful, fresh designs. An example of this is the Portland building; Oregon designed by Michael Graves. (See Fig. 1) This block of government office buildings built in 1980 has an extremely decorative external and is becoming an icon of Post modernism. Post modernism came into being when modernist views were being rejected by many people and architects although there where still some whom where in favour of the current modernist ideas, but still recognized the need for further development in this particular style to take place as the entire world fast extended to modernise around them, this observed the origins of Postmodernism.
This price from Michael Graves provides his view how modernism designed everything to be machine like, which performed, although buildings should be produced decorative rather than so occur the modernist ways:
"While any architectural vocabulary, to be built, will always exist within the specialized realm, it is important to keep carefully the technical appearance parallel to an equal and complementary expression of ritual and symbol. Maybe it's argued that the present day Movement performed this, that as well as its inner language; it indicated the sign of the device, and therefore used cultural symbolism. But in this case, the device is retroactive, for the device itself is a utility. So this sign is no external allusion, but rather a second, internalized reading. A significant architecture must combine both inner and exterior expressions. The external terms, which engages inventions of culture most importantly, is rooted in a figurative, associational and anthropomorphic frame of mind. "Ї±
In this estimate Graves identifies the modernist activity and exactly how they designed their properties to be like machines, extremely clean, streamlined and purely efficient with no needless design features. His view is never to think that the inside of the building should be run as a machine but to think of the building as a whole also to think beyond your modernists clean trim lines and un ornamental architecture.
Unlike the modernist structures previous to this movement the post modernism structures is usually quite ornamental, new but also borrowing some features from days gone by, such as delivering colour back into architecture which recinded for modernist period.
There is quite a lot of rivalry between your two actions, modernists strongly have confidence in 'form follows function', their architecture showing practical, formalized figures and spots, where post modernists believe in not necessarily form over function but making their useful buildings far more visually dynamic and Perhaps more of an event.
"There is no true reality not your own"2
This is a expressing from the past due 90's which shows post modernists views. They thought you will need to question simple fact and think beyond your box while the modernists presumed in questioning authority, their convinced that if people looked into why things are designed the way these are and the 'truth' is usually to be 'observed' then tradition would be questioned.
The postmodern structures features shameless looks not the same as anything before, they have got a more organic and natural feel and stand out. The post modern period also found the use of different materials being used in combination with in structures than before, whether it be the colour or the specs of the materials that was to be desired. The two main materials found in postmodern structures are rock and cup. The rock is striking and will come in a very vast range of shades, which trapped to the postmodernist ideas. The cup was used a great deal especially in the us and large city complexes, office blocks and skyscrapers such as Le 1000 de la Gauchetiere in Canada, it's the tallest skyscraper in Montreal. (See fig. 2) This is built a little down the road, in 1992 but still shows strong postmodern worth. Including the distinctive triangular copper rooftop and four copper capped entrances at each of the tower base edges. The structural central is constructed from concrete and metal and the exterior consists of wine glass in a metallic frame.
The form used in postmodern properties is also very contemporary, the building function is still very important to the designers but set alongside the modernist buildings the forms, styles and appearance of the properties are almost there for the designers sake, not for any specific reason apart from good aesthetics. WHEN I stated before there is almost a collision of beliefs between the two moves, though most of the dislike at that time was focused for the post modern architecture as the modernist architectures such as Le Corbusier, Ludwig Mies vehicle der Rohe and Walter Gropius acquired put the belief into the individuals who a building that was almost wholly predicated on function was the best way. So when post modern architects such as Frank Gehry, Robert Venturi and Eero Saarinen began designing buildings that where thinking outside the slick, functional, simple design container of modernism and completely aesthetical and almost quite wacky there was quite an uproar and possibly a confusion as people began to question that which was right for the future of structures? Were the new structures functional enough and would the new structures stand the test of time?
As people began to accept the more complex designs of the post-modern world the properties began to be popular and increasingly more architectures started to come round to the idea. In today's structures you can evidently see the enthusiasm from these preliminary designs which architects and designers have transformed modernist ideas on the head, by transporting on the idea of aesthetically satisfying designs and almost having more fun with their design rather than just concentrating on the function.
So how exactly does Postmodernism happen? Well as I have just affirmed the strongest link/lead to postmodernism was certainly the modernist designs insufficient beautification, but I also viewed some other factors that can have business lead to the introduction of postmodern structures.
As established fact, the business lead to postmodernism was when people started to reject the views of the modernist activity, though how have this come about? And why performed people learn to reject the modernist ways? The rejection of modernism first originated from architects In their works. In European countries Aldo Rossi recorded his views of the existing art activity, while in America Raunch and Scott Brown expressed similar views on the need for development of the modernist architecture. Though the most influential change originated from the task of Robert Venturi. He famously had written the publication 'Complexity and Contradiction in structures' in 1966 which attacked the modernism of international style, along with his strong views on his dislike for modernism. Inside the writing he replaces Kilometers vehicle der Rohe's (a modernist architect) modernist saying "less is more" with :
"less is a bore. Blatant simplification means bland structures"3
This quote is merely a brief look to his views in the piece, he persists throughout rejecting the 'moral', clean slash ways of modern architecture for elements that tend to be a blend of features than "pure".
Frank Gehry seems to be a name that frequently looks when investigating post modernism architecture. His Designs were very fashionable, bold and different to what had been seen before. He rejected that his work was post modernist or that it even fit into any category other than something completely new. This would not happen with a modernist architect as; even though the designs will vary all modernist's complexes generally have the same features, streamlined and pursuing function so much that there surely is not a lot of individuality between the designs. While post modernist architecture is all so decorative and ornamental that every design is exclusive. Just by taking a look at a few of Frank Gehry's designs you will surely tell that they are individual although they do participate in the post modern "category" his structures has shifted beyond the modernist era being predicated on geometric and organic forms. As Gehry says himself :
"Not every person gets the same types of talents, which means you uncover what yours are and work with them. Don't make an effort to be me, or try to be Frank Lloyd Wright, or make an effort to be I M Pei. Make an effort to be yourself. You have to know very well what drives visitors to build structures. " 4
One of Gehry's most creative items that represent this is actually the Frederick R Weisman Fine art Museum at the college or university of Minnesota, 1993(See Fig 3). The School officials decided Frank Gehry to design the coaching museum for the campus because of his focus on needs of men and women that use his structures and his unique stunning designs. The museums external is constructed of amazing, sticking forms made from brushed stainless steel on one part over looking the Mississippi river creating an abstract image of a waterfall and a seafood. The other area of the building is privately of the campus and blends in with the existing sandstone and brick properties by using terra cotta colored bricks. Frank Gehry was also commissioned to create an growth to the building that was meant to have been completed in 2009 2009 though credited to financial reasons it'll be built by next year.
This shows that post modernism is constantly on the inspired designers today and is still popular. An example of an architect that is carrying on post modernism design to today's architecture is Santiago Calatrava. Blessed in 1951 when the postmodern motion was beginning to come about, Calatrava was raised with the organic architecture from the period. Obviously heavily influenced because of it he has prolonged post modernism on in his own works. He has designed many structures, which are very well known such as the Museum of tomorrow in Rio de Janerio in Brazil and Liege Guillemins TGV stop in Belgium. La Rioja, Bodegas Ysios in Spain is one of is own designs, which is not so famous though still unique, and particularly show his postmodernism enthusiasm (See Fig 4). This building can be found amongst vineyards in Spain where la Rioja Alavesa wine beverages is produced, the business desired a building that would store the made wines and be a place where guests can test the wine. The design definitely fulfills the criteria and it is very functional; there is different part for the storing of your wine, making it and a tasting area. Although this may have been enough just in a plain rectangular building but in true post modernist style he has also added some amazing design features, the main feature is that the roof, it carries on the shapes of the surrounding hills, making a wavy organic condition. The materials he has used for the roof top design is aluminium panelling, which reflects the sunlight rendering it look even more special contrasting with the quiet vineyard surrounding.
I have researched the lead to post modern structures and touched about how it has influenced modern design today. Now to conclude this essay I'll some up my studies of what led to post modernism in architecture.
Post modernism first surfaced in the 1960s and became a movements in the first 1970s, its routes stemmed from its previous motion, modernism. Modernists acquired a very strong notion in form comes after function, their views where a building should be simply useful and machine like which did the trick well but didn't leave a whole lot of an creativity for design features and everything the buildings started out to have a lot of the same features.
In the 1960s some architects began to discover this and voiced their views in their written works, which made people recognize that designs could be a bit more exciting. Essentially the most important architect in this realisation was Robert Venturi, in his well known writing 'difficulty and contradiction in structures' he firmly portrayed his dislike for modernist architecture, saying that "less is a bore" which buildings do not have to be all about function, they can still be functional and have design features. This contributed to the lead to post modernism. Among the architects I came across who's name kept appearing when looking at post modern architecture is Frank Gehry. His designs are practical but with amazing design features using organic and natural forms and patterns to condition the structures. As has been most post modernist architecture different organic and natural and bold forms are a large feature of the building making every design unique unlike the similar designs of the modernist time. Although Gehry does not class his complexes to be post modernist or in simple fact fit into any category, his designs are definitely fitting with the era and he seems to talk about the same views as the post modernists. Properties like Frank Gehry's continue steadily to affect designers today such as Santiago Calatrava who's modern day designs quite definitely resembles that of post modernist structures.
Book review on: 20th Century Architecture by Jonathan Glancey
The 20th Century Structures explores the origins of modern structures and explains the way the history and the ever-changing public and political conditions helped shape and build the globe we are in today.
In this reserve, as the foreword claims, by writing the publication Jonathan Glancey makes an attempt to attain informing the reader of an release to structures of the 20th Century, never to cover every aspect of the subject, as he says himself,
"The topic is very vast and no book can realistically cover the complete background of the twentieth century structures. EASILY could it would either be too heavy to carry if not occur such a little type that it might be unreadable. "
This estimate also I think captures what sort of e book is written, very useful yet quite light hearted.
The book includes 8 of actions of 20th century architecture: Arts and Crafts, Classicism, organic and natural, Modernism, Post-Modernism, Robotic, Cities and Futures. Each activity has a its section which is started by a page for a short explanation of the activity then types of architecture significant to that time. Each little bit of architecture has its page with a complete colour photo showing what it appears like and a section about the creator and the building, why it was built and how it pertains to the movement and more in that time. I came across the book easy to read, and managed put down at any time and pick regress to something easier from where I kept off. I especially like the no jargon take and the fact you don't have to know an awful lot if anything on structures or the annals of the 20th century. The publication is very educational if you browse the entire thing or if you just flick to a specific section you are interested in. I originally does this but discovered that I wanted to read on further. That is as Jonathan Glancey meant as would most creators, wanting to get the attention of the audience and want to read on of their own will, as he says in the publication: "If this enables you to want to determine more then it did its job. If it stimulates you to want to be an architect then all the best. " I think he has definitely achieved his original intentions for the reserve. I borrowed this e book from the neighborhood library but I'd definitely consider buying a backup to keep as a research book.
From reading and sourcing from other architectural books, I think this fits in to the subject very well. Identification says it is more targeted at students, people who are interested in structures and starting architectures. I don't think the booklet would be so suitable for experienced architects and architect fans as it informs you of buildings and architects that this group may possibly know of, thought the may still think it is useful about the actions and to find out when the actions happened and why.
Over all I think this is an excellent e book and deserves the positive commentary it has picked up from press and other readers.